Basically, I hold offers for both courses. I would probably firm UCL and Sciences Po straight away due to the fact that I love the course, both unis are very prestigious and I like the idea of studying in Paris and in London. The only factor that is keeping me to firm it right now is that I would like to specialise in economics, and, although I might still do it at UCL, Warwick's PPE (especially the Economics major pathway) is said to be very good in this respect. Moreover, I really like the structure of Warwick's course as well. I was wondering whether anyone could give me some opinions, and which degree is likely to be more formative/give me better career prospects

I can just talk about ppe in warwick, as I'm doing this course. esps sounds really great, especially with the possibility of spending a year at sciences po.

Bear in mind that both the politics and the economics department of warwick have links with sciences po and as you're doing ppe you can apply via both departments for an erasmus year. You'd finish the course in four years as well.

The fact that you can apply via two departments obviously increases your chances of getting your first preference. The other factors are your personal statement, academic performance and your level of french. That being said I know someone who went to sciences po with very little knowledge of french - obviously not the best thing to do, but it's possible as the year doesn't count towards your degree.

ucl and warwick both have a very good reputation for economics. if you go for the major-economics pathway you get a bsc and acquire the same quantitative skills as pure economics students.

I love UCL and the dual degree is a dream- I have an offer for standard ESPS and almost picked it as my first choice over Oxford so from my point of view I know which of those I would choose!
IMO UCL has a better international reputation (+ the obvious advantage of studying abroad) and is more vibrant/interesting than living in Coventry but I'm a Londoner so obviously biased/like big cities. The only reservation I would have with the dual degree (which put me off applying) is the fact it's the first two years spent at Sciences Po- I didn't feel that I'd be comfortable with my dodgy A level French out on my own for two years so I went for the comfort of knowing I had a while to improve my standard before going but you might not mind that...

(Original post by geminibubblegum)
I love UCL and the dual degree is a dream- I have an offer for standard ESPS and almost picked it as my first choice over Oxford so from my point of view I know which of those I would choose!
IMO UCL has a better international reputation (+ the obvious advantage of studying abroad) and is more vibrant/interesting than living in Coventry but I'm a Londoner so obviously biased/like big cities. The only reservation I would have with the dual degree (which put me off applying) is the fact it's the first two years spent at Sciences Po- I didn't feel that I'd be comfortable with my dodgy A level French out on my own for two years so I went for the comfort of knowing I had a while to improve my standard before going but you might not mind that...

You're probably right that the overall reputation of UCL is higher than Warwick's. I wouldn't agree on that with regards to finance. So if that's what the TO wants to do I'd say Warwick is at least on a par with UCL. Just my opinion of course

If I read it correctly it's the first time UCL offers the programme in collaboration with sciences po? Definitely would've applied for that if they had offered it before.

And you don't have to live in coventry - fortunately. first year on campus, then in leamington spa. Obviously not london but really nice

I stick to what I've said. Visit both places. Campus life suits some people doesn't suit others. Make your mind mind after your visits.
Once again, from what I've seen the ecps-programme sounds amazing, I don't want to promote my own uni here unduly.

Thank you all very much for your advice Unfortunately I won't be able to visit Warwick and Sciences Po before I have to choose since I'm an international student, however I have already visited UCL when I had to go there to have my interview and really liked it...

My 2c:
Reputation-wise, in general terms, UCL has a stronger reputation globally, Warwick is on par in the UK and maybe slightly ahead in Asia. If you spend an Erasmus year at a leading continental European university (including Sciences Po) and/or are going to apply for big organisations or companies there, it shouldn't matter. For work in the US, both would be a bad choice.

Ask yourself what kind of student lifestyle you want. I've lived both in London and right next to the Warwick campus. While London offers many opportunities, I didn't like the hectic too much. But, then again, I got a little bored at Warwick after half a year (but I've been a post-graduate and most union activities are heavily geared towards undergrads so this could be completely different for you. Most undergraduates I've been talking to enjoyed their time there).

Most importantly, however, ask yourself where you stand ideology-wise. At UCL, you will only be taught in one economic perspective: hardcore neo-classic. Economics degrees at both universities are quite quantitative, but there are at least a couple of economics professors who're open to alternative views at Warwick as well. PaIS is quite diverse - and, compared to UCL Econ and SPP, clearly more centric/left-wing. I'm generalising and it always depends on the lecturers you might have, but if you tend to agree more with <insert any centrist- to left-wing ideology here> than <right-wing ideology>, you might not be too happy at UCL. I have no idea how economics is taught at Sciences Po, but I suppose they will have no extreme neo-classical focus which means that you might even be irritated when going to UCL afterwards as you don't get what they want from you.

Last but not least: despite taking a couple of philosophy courses as a PPE student, don't expect to get a real clue about philosophy if you're not really interested in and proactive about it. It's merely an introduction which is being offered (and some would argue not even that but just a 101 in ethics and stuff). Still, I like the PPE and EPaIS combinations at Warwick (I had an offer a few years back).

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
I always thought UCL was on the map in the US..particularly amongst employers and academics, doubt the average layman will be familar with UCL though.

Well, yeah, after the recent international rankings I guess the bigger companies will have heard of it. Still, it seems to be hard enough for LSE grads to find a job there, so if it's not Oxbridge, you should really go for studies in the US itself. Doesn't have to be a private one, Berkeley, Virginia etc. are fine to make it through the first screening.

Then again, a decent UCL degree with proper internships and cover letter/tests should still provide you with a telephone interview almost everywhere (and so should a Warwick degree, ceteris paribus). TSR tends to over-estimate university reputation and under-estimate the individual's capabilities.

(Original post by Roses*)
Basically, I hold offers for both courses. I would probably firm UCL and Sciences Po straight away due to the fact that I love the course, both unis are very prestigious and I like the idea of studying in Paris and in London. The only factor that is keeping me to firm it right now is that I would like to specialise in economics, and, although I might still do it at UCL, Warwick's PPE (especially the Economics major pathway) is said to be very good in this respect. Moreover, I really like the structure of Warwick's course as well. I was wondering whether anyone could give me some opinions, and which degree is likely to be more formative/give me better career prospects

If you do PPE at Warwick just can just do Erasmus at Sciences Po. The Politics department has links to all of them (including Paris)

(Original post by Roses*)
Thank you all very much for your advice Unfortunately I won't be able to visit Warwick and Sciences Po before I have to choose since I'm an international student, however I have already visited UCL when I had to go there to have my interview and really liked it...

Warwick is like a village where everybody is young and smart and fun. Sciences Po is a small school in the centre of Paris, so whether you like the city itself or not is the important thing. Paris has some wonderful architecture, but everyone's rude and Parisian. Warwick feels like a community, but architecture-wise we only have the Koan :P

(Original post by grt)
My 2c:
Reputation-wise, in general terms, UCL has a stronger reputation globally, Warwick is on par in the UK and maybe slightly ahead in Asia. If you spend an Erasmus year at a leading continental European university (including Sciences Po) and/or are going to apply for big organisations or companies there, it shouldn't matter. For work in the US, both would be a bad choice.

Ask yourself what kind of student lifestyle you want. I've lived both in London and right next to the Warwick campus. While London offers many opportunities, I didn't like the hectic too much. But, then again, I got a little bored at Warwick after half a year (but I've been a post-graduate and most union activities are heavily geared towards undergrads so this could be completely different for you. Most undergraduates I've been talking to enjoyed their time there).

Most importantly, however, ask yourself where you stand ideology-wise. At UCL, you will only be taught in one economic perspective: hardcore neo-classic. Economics degrees at both universities are quite quantitative, but there are at least a couple of economics professors who're open to alternative views at Warwick as well. PaIS is quite diverse - and, compared to UCL Econ and SPP, clearly more centric/left-wing. I'm generalising and it always depends on the lecturers you might have, but if you tend to agree more with <insert any centrist- to left-wing ideology here> than <right-wing ideology>, you might not be too happy at UCL. I have no idea how economics is taught at Sciences Po, but I suppose they will have no extreme neo-classical focus which means that you might even be irritated when going to UCL afterwards as you don't get what they want from you.

Last but not least: despite taking a couple of philosophy courses as a PPE student, don't expect to get a real clue about philosophy if you're not really interested in and proactive about it. It's merely an introduction which is being offered (and some would argue not even that but just a 101 in ethics and stuff). Still, I like the PPE and EPaIS combinations at Warwick (I had an offer a few years back).

(Original post by grt)
My 2c:
Reputation-wise, in general terms, UCL has a stronger reputation globally, Warwick is on par in the UK and maybe slightly ahead in Asia. If you spend an Erasmus year at a leading continental European university (including Sciences Po) and/or are going to apply for big organisations or companies there, it shouldn't matter. For work in the US, both would be a bad choice.

Ask yourself what kind of student lifestyle you want. I've lived both in London and right next to the Warwick campus. While London offers many opportunities, I didn't like the hectic too much. But, then again, I got a little bored at Warwick after half a year (but I've been a post-graduate and most union activities are heavily geared towards undergrads so this could be completely different for you. Most undergraduates I've been talking to enjoyed their time there).

Most importantly, however, ask yourself where you stand ideology-wise. At UCL, you will only be taught in one economic perspective: hardcore neo-classic. Economics degrees at both universities are quite quantitative, but there are at least a couple of economics professors who're open to alternative views at Warwick as well. PaIS is quite diverse - and, compared to UCL Econ and SPP, clearly more centric/left-wing. I'm generalising and it always depends on the lecturers you might have, but if you tend to agree more with <insert any centrist- to left-wing ideology here> than <right-wing ideology>, you might not be too happy at UCL. I have no idea how economics is taught at Sciences Po, but I suppose they will have no extreme neo-classical focus which means that you might even be irritated when going to UCL afterwards as you don't get what they want from you.

Last but not least: despite taking a couple of philosophy courses as a PPE student, don't expect to get a real clue about philosophy if you're not really interested in and proactive about it. It's merely an introduction which is being offered (and some would argue not even that but just a 101 in ethics and stuff). Still, I like the PPE and EPaIS combinations at Warwick (I had an offer a few years back).

It never crossed my mind before to see the matter in these terms, so thanks for your perspective. I'm currently taking Philosophy as a A-level equivalent subject, so I have already acquired some basis in it- and I would only take Economics & Politics in my second and third year, so I wouldn't care that much about getting to study Philosophy in an extremely accurate way. Coming from a medium-sized city (330k inhabitants), I'm afraid I would get bored at Warwick, which is one of the main reasons which are putting me off from accepting their offer and I can't hide I'd rather live in Paris and in London. Yet the quality of both courses is not to be ignored, and I find it hard to compare them.

(Original post by Roses*)
Coming from a medium-sized city (330k inhabitants), I'm afraid I would get bored at Warwick, which is one of the main reasons which are putting me off from accepting their offer and I can't hide I'd rather live in Paris and in London. Yet the quality of both courses is not to be ignored, and I find it hard to compare them.

I see how London and Paris can sound (and be) exciting. On the other hand, think about the PaIS option of going to the US, HK and one or two other places as well. I'm not absolutely certain that these opportunities are open for PPE students but I think I've spoken to one who did so before (he did either PPE or EPaiS). And, well, an Erasmus year abroad is easy to accomplish and both university names would make it relatively easy to get a place at a decent university if you're results are in the 60+ range.

I'm not trying to convince you either way, but just to add: If you would get really bored in/around Warwick directly, there would always be the option to live the final year in Birmingham. It's a 20 minute train ride + 25 minute walk to campus. Not too bad. Far less, in fact, than you might have to travel in London if you want/need cheap accommodation (<£90) there.

(Original post by lucas13)
well which european universities would be good for work in the us

While I can't provide first hand experience, a couple of friends who are working in the US now plus TSR and whatever else you read or hear somewhere indicates that, as stated above, only Oxbridge and to a lesser extent LSE should provide you with a real shot at interviews for highly sought-after jobs. Should be/Is also the case for Imperial and a few other continental European ones (e.g. ETH Zurich) but depends much on the job you're looking for. If you apply to a US company for working on their business in France, obviously a grandes école degree would be an asset.

The more international (and ideally not American) a company is, the less it matters, of course. And I suppose even a Manchester degree can provide you with a decent job offer if you know someone important or won an Olympic medal. Or, at least, do a year abroad at HYSP.

tl;dr: Foreign degrees are seen as being inferior in the US (partially because they are often shorter). You have to be a very strong candidate to compete successfully. This includes your university reputation and few foreign universities are well known (and well respected). As a rule of thumb, look at the 1-2 leading or being perceived as leading institutions in industrialised countries (it's a little less rigid for the UK for obvious reasons).

I may be a bit off-topic, but I have a few questions for you who have applied to UCL/Sciences Po and already been to the interview. I am going to enrol on UCL next year, and I am gleaning everything I can about the admission process.
When will you get the results? And also, have you done anything REALLY special to stand out, besides following the news, reading books on the topic of the course etc.? What is the ratio between the applicants and people admitted?
BTW, if I really am off-topic, do you know any thread about what I want to know?
Thanks for your help, and I wish you all luck at universities!

(Original post by Petrvi)
I may be a bit off-topic, but I have a few questions for you who have applied to UCL/Sciences Po and already been to the interview. I am going to enrol on UCL next year, and I am gleaning everything I can about the admission process.
When will you get the results? And also, have you done anything REALLY special to stand out, besides following the news, reading books on the topic of the course etc.? What is the ratio between the applicants and people admitted?
BTW, if I really am off-topic, do you know any thread about what I want to know?
Thanks for your help, and I wish you all luck at universities!

I received my "recommendation for an offer" in mid March, and my official offer around ten days later. I had had my interview on Feb 29th.
According to the course manager, there around 160-170 applicants applied out of which ten people were admitted, so I would say the course is quite competitive. Apparently the number of offers they gave is equal to the places available, since Sciences Po's offer is unconditional (which means you could still go to Sciences Po even in case you missed UCL's conditions).
For what concerns what you should do: well, there are no fixed books to read, and it's unlikely that you will be asked that much about the news. What they really want to verify is your ability to think critically and independently. For example, they will give you an article to read and expect you to prepare a critical and analytical presentation on it, so I would say good reasoning skills are definitely more valuable than having an excellent prior knowledge of current affairs!
If you have any further questions, feel free to contact me